Skip to main content

Security report for clickguardian.co.uk

Click Guardian · Technology · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in Security headers, GDPR outside view and 1 other check.

Security score

71/100

Risk levelMedium

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

Click Guardian is a UK-based technology company specializing in click fraud detection and protection services for PPC advertising campaigns, primarily Google Ads and Bing Ads. Established in 2015, the company positions itself as a market leader in the UK with a subscription-based SaaS model offering automated fraud detection and blocking. Their key services include real-time monitoring, device fingerprinting, VPN/TOR/proxy detection, and comprehensive reporting. The website reflects a professional and consistent brand image with clear calls to action and a strong focus on user experience and trust. Technically, the site employs modern JavaScript frameworks, integrates multiple analytics and marketing tools, and is hosted on reliable infrastructure with HTTPS enforced. However, it lacks some advanced security headers and explicit security or incident response policies. Privacy compliance is partially addressed with a privacy policy but lacks a cookie consent mechanism. Overall, the site demonstrates a mature digital presence with room for improvement in security transparency and privacy controls.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
53/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  3. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching clickguardian.co.uk

This scan found 22 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
75
Security headers
60
Email security
70
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
53
Average
71

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

The company targets businesses running PPC campaigns on Google and Bing, offering protection against click fraud to optimize advertising budgets. Their competitive advantage lies in automated real-time blocking and multi-device support. Revenue streams are subscription-based with tiered pricing plans and agency offerings. The presence of a parent company, Further Forward Innovation Ltd., suggests a stable corporate structure. The company maintains active social media channels and a help center, indicating a commitment to customer support and engagement. Strategic partnerships appear limited but the company leverages industry-standard marketing and analytics platforms to enhance service delivery.

Security posture

Click Guardian exhibits a solid security posture with HTTPS enforced and use of Cloudflare Turnstile CAPTCHA to mitigate automated abuse. The absence of security headers and a public security policy or incident response plan are notable gaps. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were detected in the HTML content. The company does not publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file, which could improve transparency and trust. GDPR compliance is partially demonstrated through a privacy policy but lacks cookie consent mechanisms. Incident response readiness and security culture indicators are not publicly visible, suggesting an area for enhancement.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive security policy and incident response plan accessible from the website.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner/mechanism to comply fully with GDPR and ePrivacy regulations.
  3. Deploy security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to enhance browser security.
  4. Publish a vulnerability disclosure policy or security.txt file to encourage responsible reporting and improve trust.
  5. Regularly audit third-party scripts and tracking tools to minimize privacy risks and ensure compliance.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
Further Forward Innovation Ltd.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Click Guardian
Description
UK's Leading Click Fraud Protection Service - Stop Competitors, Bots & People Excessively Clicking on Your Ads.
Key services
Click fraud detection, Automated blocking of fraudulent clicks, Real-time monitoring, VPN, TOR, Proxy detection, Multi-device support, Email reporting
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
JavaScript, Cloudflare Turnstile CAPTCHA, Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics (gtag.js), Bing Ads tracking, Intercom chat widget, PostHog analytics
Frameworks
Alpine.js
Platforms
Google Ads, Bing Ads
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of Cloudflare Turnstile CAPTCHA
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Secure external scripts with crossorigin attributes
  • Use of Google Tag Manager for controlled script loading

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, PostHog
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Ad networks
Google Ads, Bing Ads
Tracking pixels
Bing Ads tracking pixel, PostHog
Marketing tools
Intercom
Transparency
good

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is fully accessible with rich content and professional design
  2. Strong focus on click fraud protection for PPC campaigns
  3. Clear call to actions with free trial offers
  4. Multiple external integrations for analytics and marketing
  5. No visible security policy or incident response information
  6. No cookie consent banner detected despite GDPR relevance
  7. Contact information is clearly presented and consistent
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built using modern web technologies including JavaScript frameworks like Alpine.js, and integrates multiple third-party services such as Google Tag Manager, PostHog analytics, and Intercom for customer engagement. Hosting appears to leverage AWS S3 buckets and Cloudflare services for performance and security. The site is mobile-optimized with responsive design and accessibility considerations. SEO is well addressed with proper meta tags, Open Graph data, and structured JSON-LD schema. Performance is fast with asynchronous script loading and preloading of critical assets. Technical debt is minimal, but security header implementation and privacy controls could be improved to reduce risk and enhance compliance.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with clickguardian.co.uk. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review clickguardian.co.uk.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.